I’ve decided to post it here -- with only a very slight edit -- as a replacement for one of the, now deleted, much older texts, so that the article’s contents also is available, and can be more easily referenced, here on the blog --- D. ]
Re: ASTROLOGICAL PLANETARY ASPECTS, and THE ANGULARITY
When we think of ASPECTS in Astrology,
we most usually tend to perceive them as functions of "division of the
circle by a number": an opposition is division by 2, a trine division by
3, a square division by 4, and so forth.
What's being attempted to be described
in this way, though is: the relationship, in terms of their peculiar position
within the space-time continuum, between two (or more) celestial bodies, and in
specific, those bodies which we clearly perceive to be moving faster than the
others, and in a rhythmic manner, which we call the "astrological
planets" (the Sun and the Moon, although not planets, also belong here).
These relationships are an *ongoingly
moving phenomenon*.
At each moment when we look at the
sky, and draw an astrological map of planetary positions, we are looking at an
instance which is a *phase* in a *process* that is ongoing, with its phases
gradually “sliding” from one into the next, and is continuous.
The easiest way to understand this is
by observing the Phases of the Moon: from one to another moment of the two
Lights coming together, we see a process of them coming to be at gradually
shifting distance between each other along the Ecliptic; at each moment, they
are in an "aspect" - there is a relationship between them which can
be defined in terms of their angular separation within the 360 degrees of a
circle.
The Ecliptic itself, though, is not a
circle. This is a belt-like *zone*, a region-area, within the whole of the
visible space-time continuum which we see and call "the sky" from the
perspective of observing from Earth. At each and every moment, every body
within the whole of this continuum, with those factors we see within the
Zodiac-zone, is *in motion*; the mutual relationships in terms of positions
between one another are continually in motion.
To use the example with the planets:
each time a given pair of planets comes to be conjunct, which is: they come
together, and we map this by determining at what degree, of the 360 degrees
used for observation, is this meeting happening, this *exact same* event has
not happened ever before nor will it be repeated ever again: all the other
bodies are also constantly in motion, their positions (measurable relative to a
given reference frame we use for observation; Ecliptic, for planets, as the
central reference) are ongoingly changing, and a meeting of this kind that we
call a planetary conjunction, although it's the meeting of the same two bodies
(and even if it be at the same degree of the Zodiac) is each time it comes to
be, as a celestial event, both: a moment-phase of an ongoing Process, and an
entirely New and Unique occurrence - such that neither ever happened before,
nor will it happen as exactly "the same" ever again.
The 360 degrees of the circle are the
most useful, most practically convenient way for us to utilize to measure and
represent to our minds this space-time area, this "belt-region" of
the sky, that we call the Zodiac.
Each degree-area of this celestial
zone has its own unique *quality*, as well as each star within the whole of the
zone (as within the whole of observable Universe) has its own unique *quality*.
By long-term observations, we have
noticed that the areas which are, within our reference-measurement-framework of
360 degrees, each 30 degrees wide, have a certain "group quality" to
them.
When an astrological planet (say, the
Moon or the Sun) comes to pass 'through' the zone which we've named as
such-and-such Zodiac constellation, through long observation we've come to be
noticing certain recognizable patterns in relation to the *nature*, or
*quality* of this particular zone. This, over time, enabled us to, via
observation and making notes, formulate a collection of *verbal imagery*,
distinguishing a certain cluster of words and mental-concepts which serve as
descriptor for each such particular zone.
The stars themselves also move, as
does our Solar system, within which we are and observe, as we travel together
with our Sun through the space-time-continuum; but from our human perspective
on Earth, the motion of the stars is so slow, that we've come to call them
"fixed stars", and in the practical way of approaching the science of
Astrology we pay the most attention to the bodies which we see are moving
rather quickly, the "planets" ( - as I said, when we speak of
Astrological planets, the Sun & the Moon are here included).
When we observe this motion of planets
in reference to each other, measured along the Ecliptic in the way that it's
most practical for us to represent it, as a belt-zone of 360 degrees, we see
that there is a *rhythm*:
in terms of our earth-point-of-view
measured days and nights, the planetary mutual meetings, and the different
phases within their process of moving between one and the next such
"meeting", happen in a way that is harmonious, akin to a musical
"beat": the Soli-Lunar period is about 28 days long, the planet
Jupiter takes about 12 years to complete one full period of motion, measured
from an its one given position-on-the-Ecliptic until the next time it visits
again this "location"; Saturn takes about 29.5 years for the same
movement, and so forth.
Each planetary body has its own
rhythm, and this we can measure in reference of two planets coming together to
meet each-other, which itself is happening within the reference to the
starry-backdrop area of the Zodiac.
So, when we say that two planets are
"in aspect", we by this infer that there is a *peculiar relationship*
between them - within their ongoing motion that is a sequence-of-phases, which
*gradually* are moving-from-one-into-the-next, transpiring during one single
period (a "beat-unit" of a given planetary pair), and for which we
can use 360 degrees to define each as a "new step" in this *ongoing
process*, from every instance of their meeting till the next.
We've come to learn, by observation,
that some of the phases are practically "more important", i.e. have
properties that we can more directly discern as "having such-and-such
quality to them"; and we've been calling these specific phases by names of
*astrological aspects*: a conjunction, a sextile, a square, a trine, an
opposition (etc.).
The *quality*, the nature of these
Aspects, is not rooted in or intrinsically defined by what the measurement tool
of division-of-circle-by-a-number exists to represent to us; each phase has its
peculiar quality, and the measurement-tool of division of circle (the use of
the 360 degrees of the circle itself, as such) is merely that - a tool, a way
to *represent* that which itself is a unique quality of peculiar ongoing,
dynamic relationship between two bodies, during their moving through the
time-space continuum, as we observe them at one or another given instance
within & during what is a *continual process*.
********************
What we call in Astrology "the
ANGULARITY" denotes the specific position of planets within the
framework-perspective of the Cube of Space:
From a given fixed reference-position
on the surface of Earth, we can say that there are 6 differentiated
"zones" or directions of the whole of space around us: in front of
the observer, behind the observer, on the left and on the right of observer,
the below, and the above.
The easiest way to imagine this is to
visualize three circle-lines which are intersecting mutually, in the
three-dimensional space around one (with the observer as its center), with each
of these circle-lines cross-meeting the other at exactly 90 degrees angle.
This is a practical way to measure the
sphere of the three-dimensional space which we perceive around us, with
ourselves at the center of such sphere-grid, as we stand at some given location
on Earth.
The position of planets aligned-with
the six points where these three circle-lines thus mutually intersect,
specifically with one of them being the Prime Vertical and the other two
crossing it at 90* each, is called "Angularity". In practice, we have
come to learn that the instances of a planet being at such a position in the
space is useful to observe; these "Angle zones" have shown themselves
to function in a way which focalizes, or emphasizes, a given planetary ergie
(principle, the intrinsic quality, related to & represented by an
astrological planet); they are also known as "zones of
expressibility".
This measurement of planetary
positions serves to show their location within the framework of the
three-circled-grid of the Cube of Space.
Where they are at the given moment in
relationship to the starry-sky (Zodiac), and in what phase each pair of planets
is, within the ongoing moving-relationship of each pair's unique
"period", is, for this peculiar kind of observation, in practical
terms fully irrelevant.
This phenomenon of planetary proximity
to or distance from Angles has also been referred to as planetary "mundane
position" in a given chart.
As of recently, there's been
increasingly more talk about and attention given to what is called
"mundane aspects":
when, measured along the
framework-reference of the described three-circles-intersecting, there's an
angular distance between two (or more planets) which, in number of degrees of
arc, corresponds to one of the three peculiar angular distances we've observed
in a phase-of-period between two planets as significant - the conjunction,
square and opposition - this has come to be called "a mundane
aspect".
Understanding the underlying natural
processes, and the different observation-perspective-frameworks (with the
related mechanisms-of-measurement applied) makes it simple and easy to See what
otherwise is getting to seem more & more complex, "esoteric" and
rather obscure, within the terms & methods used by the contemporary
Astrologers.
There really isn't such a thing as a
"mundane aspect";
when two (or more) planets occupy the angular zones, or we can see them as 90
or 180 degrees away from each other within the "mundane framework"
reference-perspective, the current actual angular phase of the ongoing-process
of their mutual relationship may or may not be accurately denoted by that same
symbol/term/degree-number used which is being applied to them within the
Mundane-framework measurements of their positions.
The word "aspect" here is
perceived not as a term denoting a phase-moment of the continual, ongoing and
rhythmical-in-nature *process* of mutual dynamic of Relationship between two
astrological planets, but as something existing "solely on Earth"
("popping up" and "disappearing" from existence exclusively
*relative to a person's particular location on Earth's surface at a given
moment*), independent from and unrelated to the actuality of the continuity of
planetary-relationship dynamics as it is within the observable
celestial-framework in the sky.
(... It is interesting to see how in
this recent development in practice of the usage of words, and directions of
movement of what-&-how of astrological methods and observations, we see a new
fractal-mirroring, a thread-tendency, of that same process and direction of motion
which many centuries ago has diverted the Vital Stream-movement of the ancient
Celestial Science, the Astro-Logy, bringing it to become "divorced from
the stars", by turning it into something bound to the four discernable
moments of Earth's own periodic rotation around the Sun, in specific, the four
climate-seasons of the Northern hemisphere, and consequently, bringing the pure
vitality of this authentic scientific Stream to get sinking deeper and deeper
into the mud of obscurity and dysfunctionality ... until the mid-Twentieth
century, when one --- born-with Sun-Moon, Uranus-Sedna, Uranus-Eris &
Mercury-Eris as the-closest four of the tightest-orbed five planetary inter-aspects in
his chart! --- observant- human's open heart and mind received the information
that *it IS about the Stars!*, the roots of the Science have been revealed
anew, and the Stream itself started moving in a re-vitalized manner ...)
We can understand and use the
Angularity phenomenon, without any need to, in this process, get into
"divorcing astrology from the stars".
It is when some given set of
regularly-used tool-charts starts to show as obviously not-accurate-enough, not
providing precise and reliable information as it's expected to, and with
consistency, that there arises a tendency of coming up with more and more
"add-ons", an increasing complexity of additional
techniques-within-techniques, together with greater and greater reliance on
broad generalizations, and tendency toward basing the whole methodology on
"statistical information" rather than Observation - all in order to
somehow get to explain-away, and "prove" the non-accurate-enough,
lacking precision and non-reliable upon techniques as "absolutely
accurate" and "indisputably working", in the face of life itself
and experience bringing over time more and more evidence to the contrary.
For a fully-functional practical
approach to the occurrence of *simultaneous Angularity of multiple planets* in
a chart (including the specific angular distance within this framework, which
now are being lumped under the term "mundane aspects"), we simply
need to:
be aware of what is implied by the
term "proximity to Angles", along with having the most basic
knowledge of the planetary principles themselves, thus included.
A planet on or very-close to an Angle
in practical sense denotes: the ergie/astrological-principle represented by
this planet is being *focalized*:
the principles, processes, individual
needs, and various things and occurrences represented by this planet play a
prominent role, are being In-the-focus, or Highlighted, throughout the events
and, generally, phenomena of experience to which the given chart pertains.
When a grouping of two or more planets
is being thus positioned, it becomes easy to grasp the core picture and
accurately verbally formulate the essential message thus conveyed (and give
clear and concise predictions, if it's a predictive-technique chart), by
merely:
---> sorting out the focalized
factors via what's-closest-to-Angle among them, and what's-further-away, along
with
---> paying proper attention to
what peculiar, *exact grouping of factors* is it that we're looking at here.
(Whether it is a Nativity kind of
chart, or a Period chart, will affect the number of layers thus accounted for -
the Return charts requiring to consider both the planets in this chart itself,
and the positions of the Natal-chart planets within this framework of Angles of
the Period chart;
but this is a matter of number of
layers, and of knowing "what is from where"; it does not affect the
simple, basic how-to of interpretation-approach to the Angularity; all the
potential confusion, arising from the occurrence of a large number of factors
coming to be thus clustered, is easily avoided by simply being aware which of
these focalized planets are "transiting", i.e. from the Return chart
itself, and which are the factors from within the Natal chart.)
*************************************************
NOSCE TE IPSVM
